Related articles |
---|
Managing the JIT herron.philip@googlemail.com (Philip Herron) (2009-07-22) |
Re: Managing the JIT echristo@gmail.com (Eric Christopher) (2009-07-24) |
Re: Managing the JIT herron.philip@googlemail.com (Philip Herron) (2009-07-25) |
Re: Managing the JIT armelasselin@hotmail.com (Armel) (2009-07-25) |
Re: Managing the JIT herron.philip@googlemail.com (Philip Herron) (2009-07-27) |
Re: Managing the JIT cr88192@hotmail.com (BGB / cr88192) (2009-07-27) |
Re: Managing the JIT cr88192@hotmail.com (BGB / cr88192) (2009-07-28) |
Re: Managing the JIT armelasselin@hotmail.com (Armel) (2009-07-29) |
Re: Managing the JIT cr88192@hotmail.com (BGB / cr88192) (2009-07-30) |
Re: Managing the JIT armelasselin@hotmail.com (Armel) (2009-07-31) |
Re: Managing the JIT barry.j.kelly@gmail.com (Barry Kelly) (2009-08-01) |
[4 later articles] |
From: | Philip Herron <herron.philip@googlemail.com> |
Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
Date: | Mon, 27 Jul 2009 02:35:56 +0100 |
Organization: | Compilers Central |
References: | 09-07-079 09-07-093 |
Keywords: | code, incremental |
Posted-Date: | 29 Jul 2009 08:35:18 EDT |
Armel wrote:
> "Philip Herron" <herron.philip@googlemail.com> a icrit dans le message de
>
>> [...]
>> something. I am having trouble finding more stuff on how this works
>> would be great if you could point me in the right direction?! :)
>>
>
> I just felt on the asmjit project : http://code.google.com/p/asmjit/
> it seems that it does not contain megatons of code, you may find
> interesting to read it.
Hey
Thanks for that link its pretty interesting i have been toying with my
own idea of creating a mini jit execution system i guess. I have a bit
of a mini x86 code-gen for basic things like additions multiplications
and arrays etc. But its by no means complete, and i dont think i ever
would, because LLVM would be much more complete than anything i could do
on my own. But i started with my interpreter to jit functions using llvm
not fully working but alot of the test code is there so when functions
are called:
main()
{
do_x()
do_y()
}
etc...As soon as a top-level function was called like do_x or do_y etc
it would go into my symbol table of the functions and iterate though and
jit any other lower level function calls down the tree as it needed but
i only went 3 functions deep was my test but it should work on as i just
used stacks to maintain my place in the tree. I am wondering how this
impacts object oriented languages.
If you have a function that creates an instance of a class do you jit
the data structure along with its member functions or do the member
functions as you called them. I guess i would just do it as i called
them for now. Then a non-deterministic language like haskell could get
confusing also. Hmm i think i need to do some experimentation. I'll be
posting links to my interpreter soon enough and my gcc internal
documentation soon. Its taking a lot longer than i thought to do.
--Phil
http://redbrain.co.uk
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.